Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Ultradense, 3-D Data Storage

Chips that use graphite show promise for storing more bits than flash memory.

By Kate Greene

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

For decades, engineers have tweaked chip design to store more data in a smaller space. But as chip components continue to shrink, engineers are looking at alternatives to silicon that might provide better performance at small sizes. One possible approach is to use carbon in the form of nanotubes--tiny, rolled-up sheets of carbon atoms--or in the form of graphene--single, flat sheets of the atoms. However, neither of these structures is easy to mass-produce and to integrate onto chips using existing manufacturing processes.

Cracking memory: These scanning electron microscope images of the graphite strip show an unaltered memory cell (top) and a cell that holds a bit of data (bottom), as represented by the crack.
Credit: James Tour

But now, researchers at Rice University in Houston have shown that graphene's cousin, graphite, can be used to make a fast, high-density memory device with some of the advantages of flash memory typically found in memory cards and MP3 players. Graphite, the same material found in pencils, comes in multiple sheets and flakes, and can be deposited onto silicon using standard deposition processes, unlike nanotubes and graphene.

The graphite memory device, built by James Tour, professor of chemistry at Rice University, and postdoctoral researcher Alexander Sinitskii, is similar to flash in that it has no moving parts, which means it's more robust than a magnetic hard drive. But unlike flash memory, which stores bits as electrical charge, graphitic memory won't wear out as quickly. And graphite memory cells can be vertically aligned and stacked, which means that a chip using graphite has the potential to store 10 times more bits in the same space than today's flash memory.

A graphite memory cell is composed of sheets of graphite deposited between two electrodes. The two-electrode design of graphitic memory differs from that of flash memory, which requires a "source," a "drain," and a "gate" to hold electric charge--essentially the bits of data. Because flash memory must store charge on the gates, which tend to leak, the cells wear out over time.

Story continues below

Graphitic memory works differently. When a certain voltage is applied to a memory cell, the strip of graphite cracks, explains Tour. The presence or absence of a crack--represented as a 0 or a 1--can be read by applying a lower voltage across the electrodes. Applying a larger voltage smoothes the crack, essentially erasing the bit. Tour admits that he isn't sure of the exact mechanism that occurs during the process of writing data, but he suspects that the voltage creates a filamentary structure within the carbon that interacts with the surrounding silicon, producing a characteristic electrical signature.

The two-electrode structure of graphitic memory is what enables it to be built in a three-dimensional memory cell, explains Tour. The three-component structure of flash memory makes it overly complicated to connect memory cells vertically. Graphitic memory, on the other hand, can easily be deposited between two layers of electrodes.

Comments

  • Memory dream?
    It sounds like it fulfills most of the requirements to be a breakthrough tech:
    When compared to the current tech: Flash
    - can use existing manufacture methods
    - Faster
    - more energy efficient
    - more space efficient
    - more reliable
    - No foreseeable massive price increase

    The only damper on this article is the 8 year forecast for commercialization.
    If no glaring flaws are found, I look forward to seeing this tech in the future!
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Shiladie
    09/16/2009
    Posts:54
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
  • No moving parts?
    How can they say it has "no moving parts" and "won't wear out over time"?  The storage mechanism is a CRACK.  They might be correct -- maybe the crack can form and disappear billions of times -- but you can't simply assume that.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    dmm
    09/16/2009
    Posts:186
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: No moving parts?
      It has no moving parts for the purpose of anything that will affect us.  You're right, everything has moving parts, those dang atoms just won't stop vibrating, and that's before we even go subatomic!  We have to have a sense of scale when looking at this sort of technology...

      In addition, one of the principle reasons they are saying it will take 8 years before it's commercialized, is because they need to test if it does form and fix the crack without deviation.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      Shiladie
      09/16/2009
      Posts:54
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
    • Re: No moving parts?
      How many times of writing&reading the device can afford?
      How about the stability of the cracks?
      The article does not mention the data.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      gearss
      09/16/2009
      Posts:9
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      • Re: No moving parts?
        It mentions this exactly, at the end where it touches on the fact it will be 8 years of testing to gather this information before it will be able to be commercialized.

        It's not the article neglecting to tell you the information, it's the fact the info isn't known yet...
        Rate this comment: 12345

        Shiladie
        09/18/2009
        Posts:54
        Avg Rating:
        4/5
  • Let me make a prediction:
    One of the things they're going to find is that if they (CAN) choose ahead of time where the "crack" is going to occur (possibly by a process very similar to perforating the edges of a stamp) they will find they are then able to a) more fully characterize the MTBF of the bit, b) "stagger" the "crack" location to prevent interaction with adjacent layers in a three-D stack (an otherwise possibly-problematic issue), and possibly c) play around with multi-valued "bits" (i.e., embedding two, three, maybe four bits of data into one layer of one graphite 'cell').

    You heard it here first. I'd be curious to get an opinion whether this type of public discourse MIGHT interfere with patentability... Anyone??

    Venturing "sideways" -- I'd also be curious to find out more about the energy levels involved (in particular, at what frequencies is graphite transparent?); specifically, whether a properly prepared surface, illuminated by an image-modulated input and then strobed by a second "bias" input, could, by virtue of the combined energy inputs exceeding some "write" threshold, capture the image-modulated input across that surface... (oh, man, nice -- if you assume some useful optical transmission loss through each layer of a given 'stacked' cell, you could get a 'digitized' signal based on how deeply switching occurred).

    Maybe not -- but interesting to contemplate, because with gradient-controlled multiple bits on multiple layers per cell and an optical write AND read potential (hey, that "crack" looks visible, so there's some cell-specific potential for useable interference effects), yet another type of holographic data storage doesn't sound all that far fetched.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    flared0ne
    09/21/2009
    Posts:38
    Avg Rating:
    3/5

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Changing A Cell's Biological Battery
Technology Review September/October 2009

Current Issue

The TR35
Technology Review presents its ninth annual list of leading young innovators.
•  Subscribe
Save 36%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.